M\u00e1 t\u00e1 an fear laige iontu, t\u00e1 Dia d\u00edlis. Mura nd\u00e9anfaidh an fear ag brath ar nach mbeidh a forgiven, ach Dia f\u00f3s go maith. N\u00ed f\u00e9idir le Dia a sh\u00e9anadh \u00e9 f\u00e9in, t\u00e1 s\u00e9 unchanging. Conas is f\u00e9idir \u00e9 seo a? Dia f\u00f3s “go maith” fi\u00fa nuair punishes s\u00e9 an transgressors? Yup! Is \u00e9 an B\u00edobla categorical: “Gach bronntanas maith agus t\u00e1 gach bronntanas iontach \u00f3 thuas, ag teacht anuas \u00f3n Athair na soilse, lena nach bhfuil aon athr\u00fa n\u00f3 sc\u00e1th casadh” (James 1:17); “Chun T\u00e1 m\u00e9 an Tiarna, n\u00ed athra\u00edonn I; d\u00e1 bhr\u00ed sin, nach bhfuil mic ye de Jacob chaitear” (Malachi 3: 6).<\/p>\n
“Moladh sibh an Tiarna, le haghaidh bhfuil s\u00e9 go maith: mar endureth a bhuanghr\u00e1 go deo” <\/span>(Salm 136: 1)<\/p>\n R\u00e9amhr\u00e1<\/p>\n Dia go maith! Is \u00e9 seo an seasamh na Scripture.<\/p>\n Chomh maith leis an preideac\u00e1id’maith’, t\u00e1 cur s\u00edos ar Dia mar cheann a bheidh i seilbh an maithi\u00fanas agus go hioml\u00e1n cine\u00e1ltas le gach duine a iarraidh ar Eisean “Chun tusa, a Thiarna, eala\u00edn maith, agus r\u00e9idh a logh, agus plenteous i tr\u00f3caire ris go l\u00e9ir go iarraidh ar dhuit “<\/span>(Salm 86: 5).<\/p>\n Cad mar gheall ar iad si\u00fad nach bhfuil glaoch ar Dhia? Dia go maith? T\u00e1, t\u00e1 Dia go maith! L\u00e9ir\u00edonn an B\u00edobla go m\u00e1 t\u00e1 an fear laige iontu, s\u00e9 f\u00f3s d\u00edlis, d\u00e1 bhr\u00ed sin, is \u00e9 Dia maith, fi\u00fa nuair nach bhfuil an fear a caoin amach “M\u00e1 t\u00e1imid faithless, s\u00e9 f\u00f3s d\u00edlis: n\u00ed f\u00e9idir leis a sh\u00e9anadh \u00e9 f\u00e9in”<\/span> (2 Timothy 2:13 ).<\/p>\n M\u00e1 t\u00e1 an fear laige iontu, t\u00e1 Dia d\u00edlis. Mura nd\u00e9anfaidh an fear ag brath ar nach mbeidh a forgiven, ach Dia f\u00f3s go maith. N\u00ed f\u00e9idir le Dia a sh\u00e9anadh \u00e9 f\u00e9in, t\u00e1 s\u00e9 unchanging. Conas is f\u00e9idir \u00e9 seo a? Dia f\u00f3s “go maith” fi\u00fa nuair punishes s\u00e9 an transgressors? Yup! Is \u00e9 an B\u00edobla categorical: “Gach bronntanas maith agus t\u00e1 gach bronntanas iontach \u00f3 thuas, ag teacht anuas \u00f3n Athair na soilse, lena nach bhfuil aon athr\u00fa n\u00f3 sc\u00e1th casadh”<\/span> (James 1:17); “Chun T\u00e1 m\u00e9 an Tiarna, n\u00ed athra\u00edonn I; d\u00e1 bhr\u00ed sin, nach bhfuil mic ye de Jacob chaitear”<\/span> (Malachi 3: 6).<\/p>\n Beidh Dia f\u00f3s “go maith” fi\u00fa nuair pouring a wrath ar an impenitent? Conas is f\u00e9idir go mbeadh an oiread sin ag fulaingt i daonnachta agus Dia f\u00f3s go maith? Is f\u00e9idir leat a r\u00e9iteach le Dia ‘omnipotent’ agus ‘go maith’ leis an bhfadhb i l\u00e1thair ag an fheals\u00fanacht go bhfuil olc?<\/p>\n Roinnt mheas na ceisteanna seo mar fhadhb diagachta de mh\u00e9id m\u00f3r, \u00e1fach, nach bhfuil an fhadhb i nDia, ach, ar an tuiscint ar a l\u00e1n a thriail fheals\u00fanacht a chumasadh leis an diagacht.<\/p>\n Dia maith<\/p>\n Dia Dia, is \u00e9 sin, omnipotent, omniscient agus omnipresent. Deirtear linn freisin i an B\u00edobla go bhfuil Dia Tiarna agus Fhlaitheasacha agus Athair, R\u00ed, etc.<\/p>\n Ach cad is br\u00ed le ‘go maith’ nuair a l\u00e9igh muid: “Is \u00e9 Dia maith ‘?<\/p>\n Is \u00e9 an ch\u00e9ad imoibri\u00fa l\u00e9itheoir leasmhara a fhios ag an bhr\u00ed f\u00edor an t\u00e9arma a lorg focl\u00f3ir agus a chur ar an l\u00e9amh seo a leanas: “maith – aid. – 1. Is \u00e9 sin mar ba ch\u00f3ir go mbeadh s\u00e9 n\u00f3 conas ba ch\u00f3ir dom a bheith; 2. Cad \u00e9 maitheas; 3. scili\u00fail, ceart-l\u00e1imh; 4. Oibr\u00ed = 5. fabhrach; 6. Brab\u00fasach, 7. witty, greannmhar; 8. comhl\u00edontach a ndualgais; 9. S\u00e1bh\u00e1ilte, soladach; 10. rialta, Gn\u00e1th; 11. Oiri\u00fanach. – S. m. – 12. Dea Man “<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n C\u00e9 acu ceann de na predicates bhfeidhm do Dhia nuair a l\u00e9igh muid ‘Is \u00e9 Dia maith’? Is iad na aidiachta\u00ed at\u00e1 liostaithe thuas ar fad a bhaineann le fear worldview ar \u00e1r gcuid ama, an picti\u00far de fear nua-aimseartha. Do Tagra\u00edonn nua-aimseartha fear maith ‘le bhua pearsanta, di\u00fascairt buan duine gan \u00e9 a dh\u00e9anamh olc, benevolent.<\/p>\n Ach ba \u00e9 seo an salmaire ar worldview David nuair a d\u00fairt s\u00e9: “Is \u00e9 Dia maith”?<\/p>\n C\u00e9 go bhfuil an r\u00e9imeas David aicmithe mar theocratic, ina sochaithe am a bh\u00ed strucht\u00fartha agus saothraithe cult\u00far le prionsabal aristocratic, toisc go raibh achar m\u00f3r idir an r\u00ed agus a n-\u00e1bhar. I gcaidreamh s\u00f3isialta, bh\u00ed bearna ollmh\u00f3r idir m\u00e1istir agus seirbh\u00edseach, an-feinim\u00e9an cumainn aristocratic.<\/p>\n Tr\u00edd is tr\u00edd, uasaicme (an \u03b1\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03af\u03b1 Gr\u00e9ige \u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 (aristos), is fearr, agus \u03ba\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 (Kratos), cumhacht, st\u00e1it), a l\u00e9amh ‘cumhacht de na fearr’, is \u00e9 sin, t\u00e1 s\u00e9 ina foirm an rialtais ina gr\u00fapa elitist rialuithe an chumhacht pholaiti\u00fail, agus an chathair-st\u00e1it ar an sampla st\u00e1das Spartans rialaigh ag aristocracy.<\/p>\n Ainmni\u00fa den s\u00f3rt sin “cumhacht ag an chuid is fearr” i gcuimhne d\u00fainn go bhfuil, i antiquity, bh\u00ed ainmnithe na aristocrats ‘is fearr’, ‘go maith’, ‘t\u00fa’, ’difri\u00fail’, ’roghnaithe’.<\/p>\n Dea? Yup! Is \u00e9 an t\u00e9arma Gr\u00e9igis aistri\u00fa Jaeger, Werner, PAIDEIA, an foirmi\u00fa fear aistri\u00fach\u00e1in Gr\u00e9ige “go maith” \u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03b8\u03bf\u03cd\u03c2 (agathos), de thionscnamh eile a fhreagra\u00edonn do an fhr\u00e9amh ainmfhocal Arete “… at\u00e1 ann f\u00e9in an teaglaim de uasal agus prowess m\u00edleata (…) beagnach riamh go bhfuil an tuiscint n\u00edos d\u00e9ana\u00ed’maith ‘, mar nach bhfuil Arete bhfuil an bhua mor\u00e1lta “<\/em><\/span>Arthur M. Parreira, Londain: .. Ed Martins Fontes, 2003. Page 27;<\/p>\n “Thiarna\u00ed Tal\u00fan agus Arete bh\u00ed aontaithe inseparably. Is \u00e9 an focal fr\u00e9imhe an gc\u00e9anna: \u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, S\u00e1rch\u00e9imneach idirdheal\u00fa agus roghnaithe … “<\/span><\/em>Ibid, lch 26..<\/p>\n Ba \u00e9 an coinn\u00edoll tiarna tal\u00fan foirfe \u00f3 thaobh feidhme de, is \u00e9 sin, as l\u00e1thair an nuance mor\u00e1lta go bhfuil \u00e1r socha\u00ed a \u00fas\u00e1idtear agus praises, ionas go mbeidh an coinn\u00edoll choinnigh t\u00fa caidreamh intreach leis an smaoineamh maith.<\/p>\n Friedrich Nietzsche sa chuid oibre ‘The Ghinealais na mhor\u00e1ltacht’, rinne an bhreathnaithe seo a leanas: “… a chialla\u00edonn go d\u00edreach, \u00f3 thaobh etymological de, na hainmni\u00fach\u00e1in do ‘go maith’ chum na teangacha \u00e9ags\u00fala? Fuair m\u00e9 ansin amach go dtagra\u00edonn siad ar fad leis an claochl\u00fa c\u00e9anna coincheap\u00fail – sin, i ngach \u00e1it, ‘uasal’, ‘aristocratic’ sa chiall s\u00f3isialta, is \u00e9 an coincheap bun\u00fasach as a forbra\u00edodh g\u00e1’maith’, a ’spiorad\u00e1lta uasal ‘,’ aristocratic ‘\u00f3’ spiorad\u00e1lta dea-rugadh ‘,’ go spiorad\u00e1lta phribhl\u00e9id ‘: forbairt a ritheann i gc\u00f3na\u00ed comhthreomhar leis a dh\u00e9anamh eile’ coitianta ‘,’ coitianta ‘,’ \u00edseal ‘T\u00e1 transmuted ar deireadh’ olc ‘”<\/em><\/span>Nietzsche Friedrich, Ginealas mor\u00e1lta – A chonsp\u00f3id, Aistri\u00fach\u00e1n Paulo C\u00e9sar de Souza, S\u00e3o Paulo: Companhia das Letras, 2009. Page 18 ..<\/p>\n Aistri\u00fa na agathos focal Gr\u00e9igise le haghaidh’maith’ mar gheall ar an athr\u00fa ar bhr\u00ed thar na c\u00e9adta bliain overturns an smaoineamh gur ch\u00f3ir an l\u00e1thair B\u00edobla, do focal Gr\u00e9igise ‘agathos’ mar gheall ar an gcomhth\u00e9acs b\u00edobalta ina bhfeidhm\u00edonn s\u00e9, a aistri\u00fa mar ‘uasal’mar gheall ar an fhr\u00e9amh etymological an focal’ agathos ’duine at\u00e1, a bhfuil f\u00edrinne, cad \u00e9 f\u00edor, f\u00edor’ acmhainn. Maidir leis an t\u00e9arma, dearbha\u00edonn Nietzsche go fi\u00fa maidir le hathr\u00fa suibiacht\u00fala, cialla\u00edonn an t\u00e9arma ‘an f\u00edor mar f\u00edor’. \u00das\u00e1ideadh an t\u00e9arma a dh\u00e9anamh ar an mana an uasal, d’fhonn idirdheal\u00fa a dh\u00e9anamh ar an uasal an fear coiteann, liar (Jaeger, PAIDEIA, lch. 19).<\/p>\n Cad \u00e9 an bhr\u00ed at\u00e1 le ‘f\u00edor’ a l\u00e9ann s\u00e9: “De r\u00e9ir aon acmhainn; i gc\u00f3na\u00ed a ligean Dia a bheith f\u00edor agus gach fear a liar; mar at\u00e1 s\u00e9 scr\u00edofa, Go mayest thou a chosaint i thy sayings, agus mightest sh\u00e1r\u00fa nuair eala\u00edn tusa mheas “<\/span>(R\u00f3mh\u00e1naigh 3: 4). N\u00f3, cad \u00e9 an bhr\u00ed at\u00e1 le ‘liar’? Sa v\u00e9arsa, an bhr\u00ed at\u00e1 le ‘f\u00edor’ agus connotation mor\u00e1lta ‘liar f\u00e9in? Tagra\u00edonn s\u00e9 do charachtar an duine aonair? Tabhair faoi deara:<\/p>\n “Agus chuaigh na seirbh\u00edsigh amach ar an highways, agus bailithe le ch\u00e9ile ar fad fuair siad, idir olc agus mhaith: agus tugadh an bainise le a\u00edonna”<\/span> (Mt 22:10);<\/p>\n Conas \u00e9 a l\u00e9iri\u00fa ar an parabal? An olc agus an dea-a thug scl\u00e1bhaithe na horduithe a mh\u00e1istir T\u00e1 cialla mor\u00e1lta? An bhfuil Gan! Sa t\u00e9acs, t\u00e1 olc agus dea an tuiscint ar \u00e9 ‘vile’ agus ‘uasal’, ‘beag’ agus’m\u00f3r’, chun Tiarna an parable aon respecter daoine.<\/p>\n “Is c\u00fais s\u00e9 a ghrian ag ard\u00fa ar an olc agus an dea-, agus cuireann b\u00e1isteach ar an d\u00edreach agus an \u00e9ag\u00f3rach”<\/span> (Matha 05:45).<\/p>\n Sa tSeanm\u00f3ir ar an Sliabh, a bhfuil an tuiscint ar maith agus olc? Anois t\u00e1 a fhios againn go bhfuil Dia aon respecter daoine, agus go arduithe an ghrian os cionn uaisle agus commoners, c\u00f3ir agus an \u00e9ag\u00f3rach, mar sin n\u00ed f\u00e9idir leis an bhr\u00ed na bhfocal ‘olc’ agus’maith’ a l\u00e9iri\u00fa sa chiall mor\u00e1lta.<\/p>\n “Is \u00e9 an comhlacht ar an lampa na s\u00fal; ionas go m\u00e1 t\u00e1 do sh\u00fail maith, beidh do chorp ar fad a bheith \u00e9adrom; Ach m\u00e1 t\u00e1 do sh\u00fail olc, t\u00e1 do comhlacht ioml\u00e1n dorchadais “<\/span>(Mt 06:22 -23).<\/p>\n F\u00e9adfaidh na s\u00faile a bheith go mor\u00e1lta olc n\u00f3 maith? N\u00f3 tagra\u00edonn an tuiscint ar ‘olc’ agus ‘go maith’ ar an smaoineamh simpl\u00ed, coitianta, i gcodarsnacht leis an smaoineamh maith, go bhfuil uasal? Molann an tr\u00e1chtaire Barclay aistri\u00fa’maith’ le fial, \u00e1fach, nach bhfuil, an t-aistri\u00fach\u00e1n ceart, mar gheall ar dtagra\u00edonn an smaoineamh fial do liobr\u00e1laithe na uaisle dh\u00e9anamh is cuma cad a bh\u00ed siad leis an m\u00e9id a bhain d\u00f3ibh “Chun n\u00edos d\u00edlis don t\u00e9acs bunaidh aistri\u00fa againn anseo flaithi\u00fail i bhfeidhm go maith n\u00f3 simpl\u00ed. Molann \u00cdosa an ts\u00fail flaithi\u00fail “<\/em><\/span>Barclay, William, Tr\u00e1chtaireacht ar an Tiomna Nua. P. 264.<\/p>\n D\u00e1 r\u00e9ir sin, an m\u00e9id seo a leanas sliocht:<\/p>\n “An bhfuil s\u00e9 dleathach do dom a dh\u00e9anamh cad ba mhaith leat a bhfuil mianach? N\u00f3 an bhfuil do olc s\u00fal mar t\u00e1 m\u00e9 go maith?” (Mt 20:15)<\/p>\n Mar gheall ar an liobr\u00e1laithe a bh\u00ed ann f\u00e9in an’maith’ a dh\u00e9anamh ar an a chonaic oiri\u00fanach leis an m\u00e9id a bhain d\u00f3ibh, na hoibrithe rebuke uasal mbaineann a cinsireacht ar a ghn\u00edomh. Dar leis an dearcadh fear ar \u00e1r gcuid ama, is \u00e9 iompar an fhost\u00f3ra a despaut\u00e9rio toisc ionann s\u00e9 oibrithe an tuarastal c\u00e9anna do gach a dheon\u00fa gan aird ar an am oibre de gach, \u00e1fach, de r\u00e9ir an fh\u00eds de dh\u00e9ant\u00fas an duine ag an am a Chr\u00edost eascra\u00edonn an despaut\u00e9rio nuair d\u00fashl\u00e1n an fear coiteann ar liobr\u00e1laithe an uasal “ar feadh tr\u00ed rud go bhfuil an talamh disquieted; agus ceithre nach f\u00e9idir a iompr\u00f3idh: Le haghaidh seirbh\u00edseach nuair a s\u00e9 reigneth; agus an amad\u00e1n nuair a bh\u00edonn s\u00e9 l\u00e1n le feoil; I gc\u00e1s bean fhuafar nuair a bh\u00edonn s\u00ed p\u00f3sta; agus ban\u00f3glach at\u00e1 oidhre ar a m\u00e1istre\u00e1s “<\/span>(Seanfhocal 30:21 -23).<\/p>\n Jaeger anail\u00eds a dh\u00e9anamh ar na d\u00e1nta de Theognis, taifeadadh: “Tugann an file a sheachaint an d\u00e9ile\u00e1il leis an droch (Kakoi), ina gcuims\u00edtear an file go l\u00e9ir nach mbaineann le breith uasal; ar an l\u00e1imh eile, chomh maith, uasal (agathos) le f\u00e1il ach amh\u00e1in i measc a bpiara\u00ed “<\/em><\/span>(Jaeger, PAIDEIA, 244).<\/p>\n Anail\u00eds ar th\u00e9acsanna Bh\u00edobla nuair a dh\u00e9anamh n\u00e1r ch\u00f3ir, a bheith teoranta a \u00fas\u00e1id ach amh\u00e1in an bhr\u00ed go bhfuil na t\u00e9arma\u00ed l\u00e1 at\u00e1 inniu ann, a bhu\u00edochas leis an dearadh go bhfuil \u00e1r socha\u00ed priont\u00e1ilte le t\u00e9arma\u00ed \u00e1irithe.<\/p>\n Chomh maith leis sin, nuair a l\u00e9igh muid t\u00e9arma\u00ed \u00e1irithe i Scripture, n\u00ed m\u00f3r d\u00fainn iad a thuiscint leis na s\u00faile na socha\u00ed ag an am, agus \u00e9al\u00fa as an dearcadh domhan crafted ag prionsabail feals\u00fanachta ama, an t-\u00e1bhar go speculated na feals\u00fana an am a bh\u00ed aon \u00e9ifeacht, n\u00ed fi\u00fa an fear na cuideachta sin, a bh\u00ed tr\u00e1th r\u00e9imse ontological, agus mar sin i bhfad \u00f3 na dearadh sociocultural na scr\u00edbhneoir\u00ed B\u00edobla.<\/p>\n C\u00e9 tsocha\u00ed ruda\u00ed i dt\u00e9arma\u00ed feidhme sainithe, feals\u00fana cos\u00fail Plato, thosaigh chun ceisteanna a chur faoi n\u00e1d\u00far na huaire, na r\u00e9altachta, a bheith ann de dhaoine agus ceisteanna metaphysical, agus an t-eolas a bh\u00ed ag t\u00e1irgeadh ag an am, bh\u00ed ualach mor\u00e1lta agus eitic, nach raibh taith\u00ed acu go f\u00f3ill ag an tsocha\u00ed.<\/p>\n Jaeger Dearbha\u00edonn go raibh na t\u00e9arma\u00ed ‘Arete’ agus’maith’ sa Ghr\u00e9ig \u00e1rsa, n\u00edl aon connotation de bhua mor\u00e1lta, mar sin, an cheist: Nuair a bheidh na t\u00e9arma\u00ed a \u00fas\u00e1idtear anois le connotation mor\u00e1lta? Nuair feals\u00fana cos\u00fail Socrates agus Plato, tr\u00ed tuairim\u00edocht eolais agus eola\u00edocht, thuill feals\u00fanacht ord\u00fa mor\u00e1lta toisc go bhfuil s\u00e9 eola\u00edocht a speculates ar ghn\u00e9ithe agus fadhbanna oird ontological.<\/p>\n Fad is a bh\u00ed teoranta i tuairim\u00edocht Socrates le saincheisteanna ontological agus mor\u00e1lta, bh\u00ed Plato baint acu leis an mb\u00f3thar na metaphysics agus cosmology. I Plato bh\u00ed rath agus bl\u00e1th feals\u00fanacht daonn\u00fail, reiligi\u00fanach agus moralistic. T\u00e1 s\u00e9 i n-oibreacha de Plato i bhfad ar an m\u00e9id at\u00e1 f\u00f3gartha ag spiritualists agus Caitlicigh, cos\u00fail leis an smaoineamh reincarnation agus purgatory.<\/p>\n An’maith’ a ainmni\u00fa uaisle athainmn\u00edodh, an maith, an domhan id\u00e9alach, saol na smaointe. Maidir Plato Thug r\u00e9abhl\u00f3id na coincheapa, \u00e1fach, na daoine ar a l\u00e1 agus na gl\u00fanta a leanas, nach bhfuil athr\u00fa l\u00e1ithreach chuig do chleachtas. Nuair a th\u00e1inig \u00cdosa, n\u00ed raibh coincheap feals\u00fanachta s\u00f3rt f\u00f3s mar chuid de na daoine, go h\u00e1irithe iad si\u00fad a bhain \u00fas\u00e1id as na Gr\u00e9ige Koine.<\/p>\n An fhadhb is m\u00f3 a th\u00e1inig suas leis an fheals\u00fanacht forbartha ag an ch\u00e9ad sagairt, an Patristic. Nuair liot\u00fairge, discipl\u00edn\u00ed, custaim, etc, a ch\u00f3nascadh coincheapa Platonic crutha\u00edodh agus d\u00fairt Socratic go fhoirceadal Cr\u00edosta\u00ed. Sa ch\u00e9ad c\u00e9ad, feicimid an treocht mor\u00e1lta agus dogmatic D\u00e1 r\u00e9ir sin l\u00e1idir, tionchar soil\u00e9ir n\u00f3sanna ascetic.<\/p>\n Is f\u00e9idir leat a fh\u00e1il n\u00edos measa? Yup! Rotterdam Erasmus san \u00e1ireamh S\u00f3crait\u00e9as mar mairt\u00edreach r\u00e9amh-Chr\u00edosta\u00ed, mar sin begged s\u00e9, “Sancte Socrates, ora pro nobis!”<\/em><\/span> (Jaeger, PAIDEIA, 493). Jaeger point\u00ed amach go bhfuil ag an pietism lonnaithe suas sa Socrates arm, do chonaic siad cinnte cleamhnas spiorad\u00e1lta (Ibid, lch. 494). Cad faoi Agaist\u00edn, a bh\u00ed bunaithe ar smaointe Phlat\u00f3n?<\/p>\n Mar a mh\u00fain \u00cdosa \u00e9 f\u00e9in a bheith ar an mbealach go thoradh fear a Dhia, chonaic an Chr\u00edosta\u00edocht an fheals\u00fanacht Platonic an g\u00e1 at\u00e1 le srian a pl\u00e9isi\u00fair worldly, ag moladh an cleachtas st\u00edl mhaireacht\u00e1la austere, cleachtais a ghlac virtuous chasing chun a fh\u00e1il spiorad\u00e1ltacht n\u00edos m\u00f3. Dai, chuaigh go leor sagairt an id\u00e9alach ascetic, a chreidi\u00faint go mbeadh an \u00edon\u00fa an chomhlachta cabhr\u00fa i \u00edon\u00fa an anam.<\/p>\n As sin amach, gach uair a dh\u00e9anann t\u00fa tagairt do Dhia mar’maith’, is \u00e9 an t\u00e9acs l\u00edonta leis an smaoineamh na foirfeachta mor\u00e1lta, gan aird ar an bhf\u00edric go bhfuil s\u00e9 Tiarna. T\u00e1 s\u00e9 seo nuair roinnt ceisteanna chun cinn: m\u00e1 t\u00e1 Dia maith, c\u00e9n f\u00e1th go bhfuil olc?<\/p>\n T\u00e1 s\u00e9 mar aidhm cib\u00e9 ceisteanna fear dall gan a fheice\u00e1il ar an fh\u00edrinne. Mar an cheist Satan i Eden b\u00e9im n\u00edos measa cosc ar chostas na saoirse deona\u00edodh (Gen. 3: 1), an cheist,’m\u00e1 t\u00e1 Dia maith, c\u00e9n f\u00e1th go bhfuil olc’, is c\u00fais le paradoxes, i nd\u00e1ir\u00edre, n\u00ed T\u00e1 contr\u00e1rthachta\u00ed den l\u00edomhna\u00edtear mar thoradh ar m\u00edl\u00e9amh an Bh\u00edobla agus a chomhth\u00e9acs stairi\u00fail.<\/p>\n Is \u00e9 cusp\u00f3ir an t-airteagal seo a thaispe\u00e1int go bhfuil Dia maith, beag beann ar an bhf\u00edric go bhfuil spared s\u00e9 muintir na Nineveh n\u00f3 succumb dh\u00e9anamh Sodom agus Gomorrah leis na m\u00edlte leana\u00ed neamhchiontach (Geineasas 19:25; Jn 04:11). Imeachta\u00ed den s\u00f3rt sin n\u00ed mischaracterize n\u00e1 characterize an Dia an B\u00edobla mar ‘go maith’ n\u00f3 ‘olc’.<\/p>\n T\u00e1 aon cheann maith ach amh\u00e1in, is \u00e9 sin Dia<\/p>\n “A d\u00fairt \u00cdosa ris, C\u00e9n f\u00e1th a bhfuil t\u00fa ag glaoch orm go maith go bhfuil aon cheann maith ach amh\u00e1in, go bhfuil Dia?”<\/span> (Luke 18:19)<\/p>\n Nuair a deir \u00cdosa categorically: “T\u00e1 aon cheann maith ach amh\u00e1in, go bhfuil Dia,” a bh\u00ed d\u00edrithe ar chur i l\u00e1thair freagra ontological ar an bhfadhb olc? An dearbh\u00fa “N\u00edl aon duine maith, ach amh\u00e1in ceann amh\u00e1in, go bhfuil Dia” tagairt do cheist ordaithe feals\u00fanachta?<\/p>\n A r\u00e1 m\u00e9 aon! N\u00ed raibh \u00cdosa ag iarraidh ar cheisteanna feals\u00fanachta mar n\u00e1d\u00far na huaire, r\u00e9altacht, go bhfuil gr\u00e1 n\u00e1 ceisteanna metaphysical.<\/p>\n Ach nuair a deirimid, “T\u00e1 Dia maith”, an ch\u00e9ad cheist a arda\u00edodh ag na mic l\u00e9inn a bhfuil: ‘M\u00e1 t\u00e1 Dia’ omnipotent ‘agus’ go maith, agus a chur ar an cheist seo i ‘, tr\u00ed chead a thabhairt go bhfuil olc agus fulaingt?’ pedestal mar an cheist is deacra de stair na diagacht Chr\u00edosta\u00ed.<\/p>\n An bhfuil s\u00e9 inghlactha le haghaidh l\u00e1thair neamh-Chr\u00edosta\u00ed paradacsa, mar a bheidh, an paradacsa epicurean. C\u00e9n f\u00e1th inghlactha? Mar gheall ar a ch\u00e9ile ar an paradacsa aineolach ar an n\u00e1d\u00far na Dia! Epicurus d\u00fairt go Dia agus olc nach f\u00e9idir bheith ann m\u00e1 t\u00e1 Dia omniscient, omnipotent agus benevolent, ach Dia \u00e9 f\u00e9in a deir go bhfuil a fhios agam go maith agus olc “a d\u00fairt Ansin an Dia Tiarna, F\u00e9uch, t\u00e1 an fear a bheith mar cheann de d\u00fainn, a fhios agam maith agus olc “<\/span>(Gen. 3:22).<\/p>\n Dia Tiarna, uasal, is \u00e9 sin, go maith agus a fhios agam go maith agus olc, \u00f3ir is \u00e9 an Tiarna lua\u00edocht gach fir, agus a thabhairt ar na cinn maith agus an olc do dhaoine eile, go l\u00e9ir ag brath ar a lorg “C\u00e9 a rindre\u00e1il gach fear de r\u00e9ir a chuid saothar; is iad sin: an saol s\u00edora\u00ed d\u00f3ibh si\u00fad a ag lean\u00faint othar i go maith ag d\u00e9anamh a lorg do ghl\u00f3ir agus on\u00f3ir agus neamhbh\u00e1smhaireachta; Ach an fearg agus fearg d\u00f3ibh go bhfuil chonsp\u00f3ideach, d\u00e9anamh de r\u00e9ir an fh\u00edrinne, ach obey unrighteousness; Tribulation agus anguish, ar gach anam fear a doeth olc; an Gi\u00fadach ch\u00e9ad agus chomh maith leis na Gr\u00e9ige; Ach gl\u00f3ir agus on\u00f3ir agus s\u00edoch\u00e1in do gach duine a dh\u00e9anann go maith; leis na Jew ch\u00e9ad agus chomh maith leis na Gr\u00e9ige; Mar gheall ar, a Dhia, n\u00edl aon respecter daoine “<\/span>(R\u00f3mh\u00e1naigh 2: 6 -11).<\/p>\n Dia Tiarna, Dia maith agus ag an am c\u00e9anna, t\u00e1 s\u00e9 de chine\u00e1l agus dian “Behold d\u00e1 bhr\u00ed sin, an maitheas agus d\u00e9ine Dia: orthu a thit, d\u00e9ine, ach i dtreo dhuit, maitheas, m\u00e1 leanann t\u00fa ina maitheasa : ar shl\u00ed eile thou freisin a ghearradh budh as “<\/span>(R\u00f3mh\u00e1naigh 11:22), is \u00e9 sin, t\u00e1 s\u00e9 Dia a tionscna\u00edodh an pion\u00f3s do chiont\u00f3ir\u00ed, agus mar sin t\u00e1 s\u00e9 sin,” is \u00e9 mo solas, agus dorchadas a chruth\u00fa: a dh\u00e9anamh liom an ts\u00edoch\u00e1in , agus a chruth\u00fa olc: m\u00e9 an Tiarna a dh\u00e9anamh ar na nithe seo “<\/span>(an bhfuil 45: 7).<\/p>\n Cad iad chrutha\u00edonn chiall Dia olc? D’fhonn a retribution, ceartas, ionas go reciprocates le cine\u00e1ltas \u00edon agus righneas claon “an Tiarna gc\u00fait\u00edtear m\u00e9 de r\u00e9ir mo righteousness, de r\u00e9ir mo cleanness ina s\u00faile. Leis an tr\u00f3caireach, se\u00f3nna neamhurch\u00f3ideacha t\u00fa; leis an fear ina seasamh wilt thou dinnsin. Leis an \u00edon l\u00e9ir\u00edonn t\u00fa f\u00e9in \u00edon; ach leis an olc se\u00f3nna t\u00fa crua “<\/span>(2 Samuel 22:25 -27); “Leis an tr\u00f3caireach dinnsin t\u00fa neamhurch\u00f3ideacha, agus le fear ina seasamh wilt thou dinnsin thyself \u00f3 chro\u00ed”<\/span> (Salm 18:25).<\/p>\n Ba \u00ed seo an post a mh\u00e1istir: “Mar fhreagra, \u00e1fach, d\u00fairt a thighearna ris, Thusa wicked agus slothful seirbh\u00edseach; Bh\u00ed a fhios agat go bhaint as m\u00e9 i gc\u00e1s nach Chuir m\u00e9, agus a bhaili\u00fa nuair nach raibh m\u00e9 scaipeadh? Ba ch\u00f3ir duit a bheith mo chuid airgid a tugadh ansin chuig an malart\u00f3ir\u00ed, agus ag teacht ba ch\u00f3ir dom a bheith faighte mianach f\u00e9in le usury “<\/span>(Matha 25:26 -27). Iad si\u00fad a bhfuil seirbh\u00edsigh maith, cairde, leis an olc, an dorchadas seachtrach.<\/p>\n Is \u00e9 seo an seasamh Chr\u00edost: “Nuair a bheidh an Mac an Duine a thagann ina ghl\u00f3ir, agus na haingil naofa leis, ansin beidh s\u00e9 su\u00ed ar an gcathaoir ar a ghl\u00f3ir: Agus beidh na n\u00e1isi\u00fain a bhaili\u00fa roimh d\u00f3, agus ceann amh\u00e1in \u00f3 eile mar aoire scarann na caoirigh \u00f3 na gabhair (…) Agus beidh na dul amach i pion\u00f3s eternal, ach an righteous i beatha s\u00edora\u00ed “<\/span>(Matha 31-32 agus 46).<\/p>\n Nuair a cuireadh \u00cdosa: “Tar ris dom, gach sibh go saothair agus iad ualaithe trom, agus beidh m\u00e9 a thabhairt duit chuid eile. Glac mo yoke ar t\u00fa, agus foghlaim ar dom; t\u00e1im ceansa agus lowly i chro\u00ed; agus beidh teacht ar an gcuid eile do do anamacha. Do mo yoke \u00e9asca agus t\u00e1 mo ualach \u00e9adrom “<\/span>(Matha 11:28 -30), beidh an t-imreoir leis an dearcadh n\u00edos m\u00f3 a fheice\u00e1il Cr\u00edost mar ‘go maith’, ‘t\u00fa’, ‘uasal’ agus ag an am c\u00e9anna, benevolent, d\u00f3ibh si\u00fad at\u00e1 faoi r\u00e9ir ag Eisean bhfuil siad tugtha ualach \u00e9adrom.<\/p>\n Sa airdeall, “a chruth\u00fa m\u00e9 olc,” T\u00e1 tagairt ar an bhf\u00edric go bhfuil Dia ardaigh roinnt n\u00e1isi\u00fain comharsanacha cos\u00fail slat cheart\u00fa, d’fhonn a thabhairt do na daoine ar Iosrael a thuiscint ar an ng\u00e1 a thiont\u00fa (Isaiah 1: 5), \u00e1fach, in ainneoin phion\u00f3s\u00fa na daoine ar Iosrael, Dia d\u00edreach, agus mar a rabhadh, i bhfeidhm an pion\u00f3s roimh an wrath.<\/p>\n I gc\u00e1s eile, thar salvation agus damnation, beidh Dia a shol\u00e1thar do gach fear de r\u00e9ir a chuid saothar.<\/p>\n Nuair a chruthaigh Dia thug fear d\u00f3 an chumhacht an cinneadh. Toisc go bhfuil na bronntanais D\u00e9 neamh-inch\u00falghairthe, fi\u00fa tar \u00e9is sin, lean an fear i seilbh a saoirse a chinneadh, mar gheall ar tugadh an tiarnas thar an domhain le fir. Anois, nuair a th\u00e1inig Dia fear agus cuireadh ar ais victorious chun na bhflaitheas, d’iarr: t\u00e1 s\u00e9 tugtha dom go l\u00e9ir an chumhacht ar neamh agus ar talamh!<\/p>\n Toisc go bhfuil fir saor in aisce agus imirt tiarnas thar an domhain, ar f\u00e9idir leo a dh\u00e9anamh ar an siad le do thoil. T\u00e1 pointe eile, mar t\u00e1 an fear a bheith cos\u00fail le Dia, a fhios agam go maith agus olc, t\u00e1 freisin ar an gcumas chun anail\u00eds a dh\u00e9anamh ar na gn\u00edomha\u00edochta\u00ed de chuid comhalta\u00ed agus cumars\u00e1id a dh\u00e9anamh go maith agus olc.<\/p>\n Tagann an fhadhb nuair a bh\u00edonn olc fear an tuiscint ar an cheartais, agus d\u00e9anfaidh olc do phl\u00e9isi\u00far. Is \u00e9 an smaoineamh retribution a chur ar ceal, agus an duine aonair a bheidh le dhorchaigh in throws tuiscint i gcleachtas de olc. C\u00e9 go bhfuil a fhios agam na gn\u00edomhartha daoine aonair den s\u00f3rt sin, nach bhfuil Dia idirghabh\u00e1il a dh\u00e9anamh, do gach fir a tugadh isteach ar fud an domhain at\u00e1 faoi c\u00e1ineadh agus mar a Dhia, ar arbh maith agus olc.<\/p>\n Ach go maith agus olc i l\u00e1thair i Eden tr\u00ed tortha\u00ed, ionas go mbeidh maith agus olc doscartha. Is iad na maith agus olc cumad\u00f3ireachta a thugann blas leis na tortha\u00ed. T\u00e1 dh\u00e1 thaobh den mona c\u00e9anna.<\/p>\n Tuiscint ar an r\u00e9altacht? Nuair a m\u00faineann tuismitheoir p\u00e1iste agus corrects an ceart\u00fa i roinnt gn\u00e9 chuma olc, \u00e1fach, f\u00e9achann an t-athair an maith. An bhfuil duine ar bith d\u00e9irce a thabhairt cos\u00fail le bheith ag d\u00e9anamh go maith, \u00e1fach, perpetuates gn\u00edomh den s\u00f3rt sin an ainnise na ndaoine a bhfuil c\u00f3na\u00ed orthu ar d\u00e9irce, at\u00e1 i nd\u00e1ir\u00edre olc. L\u00e9ir\u00edonn sampla\u00ed den s\u00f3rt sin go bhfuil go maith agus olc doscartha.<\/p>\n Dar leis an B\u00edobla, nach bhfuil an cheartais D\u00e9 mall agus n\u00ed timpiste, toisc go raibh oibrigh an righteousness D\u00e9 i rith an ch\u00e9ad transgression agus mar sin go raibh cionta\u00edodh gach fir, beag beann ar a ngn\u00edomhartha. Mar sin f\u00e9in, i nd\u00e1il le gn\u00edomha\u00edochta\u00ed \u00f3 l\u00e1 go l\u00e1, beidh Dia a iarraidh cuntas gach fear, cib\u00e9 acu go d\u00edreach n\u00f3 \u00e9ag\u00f3rach, agus maidir leis sin, n\u00edl aon maidir le daoine. I gc\u00e1s den s\u00f3rt sin ach cuntas a leagan s\u00edos do na Su\u00edoch\u00e1n Breithi\u00fanas Chr\u00edost, agus leis an \u00e9ag\u00f3rach, an M\u00f3r B\u00e1n Throne.<\/p>\n An Apostle Paul rabhadh Cr\u00edostaithe nach bhfuil lig agat ar ch\u00faiseanna feals\u00fanachta a ach cad eile a fh\u00e1il againn i diagacht, cib\u00e9 acu comhaimseartha n\u00f3 clasaiceach, t\u00e1 ceisteanna tar \u00e9is an rudiments an domhain “N\u00ed fol\u00e1ir lest duine ar bith cheat t\u00fa tr\u00ed feals\u00fanacht agus deceit vain, tar \u00e9is an traidisi\u00fan na bhfear, tar \u00e9is an rudiments an domhain, agus n\u00ed tar \u00e9is Chr\u00edost “<\/span>(Col. 2: 8).<\/p>\n C\u00e9n f\u00e1th a meddle i feals\u00fanacht, \u00e9ileamh a l\u00e1n Cr\u00edostaithe go bhfuil na saincheisteanna afetas a chreideann i omnipotent agus gr\u00e1mhara Dia “Bhf\u00edrinne a r\u00e1, is \u00e9 an ainnise an duine, n\u00f3 olc i ngach foirm ina fhadhb ach amh\u00e1in le haghaidh an duine a chreideann i Dia amh\u00e1in, uile-chumhachtach agus gach gr\u00e1mhara “<\/em><\/span>Anderson, a ghairm den Francis I. Luiz Say\u00e3o i ‘M\u00e1 t\u00e1 Dia maith, c\u00e9n f\u00e1th go bhfuil olc?’ rud at\u00e1 ar f\u00e1il ar an ngr\u00e9as\u00e1n.<\/p>\n Cad a fheiceann muid go bhfuil go bhfuil go leor theologians at\u00e1 abhc\u00f3id\u00ed D\u00e9, ach aineolach ar a chuid focal. N\u00edos measa, ach ba ch\u00f3ir airm Cr\u00edosta\u00ed teoranta do an focal D\u00e9 toisc go bhfuil s\u00e9 in ann a daingin iad scol\u00e1ir\u00ed den s\u00f3rt sin i seilbh na n-arm ar f\u00e1il ag an domhan “Chun airm ar \u00e1r coga\u00edochta nach bhfuil colla\u00ed scrios, ach mighty tr\u00edd Dia do tarraingt s\u00edos daingin “<\/span>(2 Corantaigh 10: 4; 2 Corantaigh 6: 7; R\u00f3mh\u00e1naigh 13:12).<\/p>\n Le f\u00eds blurred mar gheall ar prionta\u00ed nua-aimseartha, bh\u00ed roinnt aistritheoir\u00ed iallach a bhaint as an t\u00e9arma ‘go maith’ in ionad ‘uasal’. Athr\u00fa ‘uasal’ go ‘go maith’ isteach ar an smaoineamh t\u00e9acs. Scriosadh an fhr\u00e9amh etymological an t\u00e9arma ‘agathos’, rud a chialla\u00edonn ‘ceann amh\u00e1in at\u00e1, a bhfuil f\u00edrinne, cad \u00e9 f\u00edor, f\u00edor’, thug dam\u00e1iste a thuiscint an t\u00e9acs.<\/p>\n Nuair a r\u00e1 againn go bhfuil Dia Noble, Sir, Good, t\u00e1 muid ag chur in i\u00fal ar an tighernus D\u00e9 agus \u00e1r n-aighneacht a d\u00f3. Is \u00e9 Dia an T\u00e1 m\u00e9, a bhfuil, go bhfuil f\u00edrinne, is \u00e9 sin f\u00edor, f\u00edor, coincheap n\u00edos fearr a fh\u00e1il i \u00e1r focl\u00f3ir\u00ed. Tr\u00edd an coincheap an-an t\u00e9arma ‘agathos’, an coincheap, an smaoineamh, \u00f3 an fr\u00e1sa ‘Dia maith’ transmutes agus tharchuireann br\u00ed ar leith.<\/p>\n Nuair a mheasaimid go bhfuil Dia maith, uasal, oirirce, a Thiarna, a Athair, n\u00edl aon contr\u00e1rtha idir d\u00e9ine agus cine\u00e1ltas “Behold d\u00e1 bhr\u00ed sin, an maitheas agus d\u00e9ine Dia: orthu a thit, d\u00e9ine, ach i dtreo t\u00fa, maitheas, m\u00e1 leanann t\u00fa ar aghaidh ina maitheasa: a mhalairt thou shalt freisin a ghearradh amach “<\/span>(R\u00f3mh\u00e1naigh 11:22).<\/p>\n Dia dian agus neamhurch\u00f3ideacha le bheith uasal, n\u00edos fearr, n\u00f3 go maith, rud a eisiann de chine\u00e1l ar bith paradacsa idir Dia maith agus ansin ag fulaingt ar fud an domhain.<\/p>\n M\u00e1 t\u00e1 theologians thar na c\u00e9adta bliain neamhaird ar an fhr\u00e9amh etymological an t\u00e9arma ‘agathos’, t\u00e1imid f\u00e1gtha leis an gceist: cad a rinne siad leis an t\u00e9arma ‘agape’, focal Gr\u00e9igise do ghr\u00e1?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Nuair a mheasaimid go bhfuil Dia maith, uasal, oirirce, a Thiarna, a Athair, n\u00edl aon contr\u00e1rtha idir d\u00e9ine agus cine\u00e1ltas<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":59,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[13,35],"class_list":["post-6","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-sem-categoria","tag-bhfuil-dia-maith","tag-patristic"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/estudosbiblicos.org\/ga\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/estudosbiblicos.org\/ga\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/estudosbiblicos.org\/ga\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/estudosbiblicos.org\/ga\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/estudosbiblicos.org\/ga\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/estudosbiblicos.org\/ga\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/estudosbiblicos.org\/ga\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/59"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/estudosbiblicos.org\/ga\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/estudosbiblicos.org\/ga\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/estudosbiblicos.org\/ga\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}